Actual Reasons Why My OPAC Sucks

Mack asked me, in the comments to my OPAC Sucks button, why my OPAC sucked. I thought it would be nice if I stopped yapping at the mouth and came up with some solid reasons that I disliked my OPAC. If I am going to spew forth the word “sucks” and “OPAC” in front of my Dean, I should be able to say why I hold this opinion.
I think my OPAC sucks because:

    1. results can only be listed in reverse chronological order
    2. results show only the title of the item with a link
    3. it will not correct my bad spelling
    4. you have to know that there are not certain formats in there (like articles)(this is an obvious endorsement for federated searching)
    5. it is ugly and people do not like to look at ugly things
    6. lots of MARC information is displayed that no one cares about, sometimes even the cataloger that had to put it there
    7. it should support tagging and tag searching AND keywords AND subject headings because people like choices (as long as they are labeled in a way that makes sense, see #14)
    8. if I do not type “U.S. News and World Reports” in exactly that fashion with the periods and spaces, my OPAC thinks we do not have this item
    9. no relevance ranking
    10. no full text searching
    11. does not correct my spelling
    12. will not allow me to print a list of marked records with meaningful information without printing out each record individually and most people, including me, do not take the time to do this
    13. user comments would be awesome
    14. In the search display, the user has to choose between keywords and subjects. Most people do not know what the difference is and end up keyword searching in a function only meant to search LCSH.
    15. it does not correct my spelling
    16. with all my practice and training, sometimes I can not find things I know we have, how can I expect my users to find anything?

      Please feel free to add some of your own.

      –Jane, needs to get back to work